Yeah Steve there are so many worthy new projects crying out to be made that there is really no need for remakes. But as long as no talent hacks like the Wachowski bros or Roland Emmerich get the big bucks I wouldn't hold my breath.

For your consideration, movies that cry out to be made:

John Carter of Mars

William Hope Hodgson's HOUSE ON THE BORDERLAND done the same way as CORALINE, non-realistic 3D stop motion.

The Stars My Destination (or The Demolished Man)

James Blish's CITIES IN FLIGHT

David Lindsay's VOYAGE TO ARCTURUS (see CORALINE)

C S Lewis's OUT OF THE SILENT PLANET (or better yet his last best novel TILL WE HAVE FACES)

Cordwainer Smith's CASHER O'NEILL novelette

GREEN LANTERN

DR STRANGE

on & on & on

“We must not always talk in the marketplace,” Hester Prynne said, “of what happens to us in the forest.”-Nathaniel Hawthorne, The Scarlet Letter

Interesting you should put Dr. Strange on your list. I was looking at preparatory stuff for the movie they'll be working on, and really seeing in my mind the possibilities (which, I guarantee, will never be realized). Dr. Strange could be a helluva film, if a REAL talent were handling it.

I'd love to see this arrogant, money-grubbing prick of a surgeon, whose talents are overwhelmed by his self-centered bitterness, with SOME backdrop info gradually reaching us about his hang-ups, wind up on the foggy docks of New York City as a binging vagrant, before a carefully-paced transformation.

What ya do, is google images of Steve Ditko's stuff and IMAGINE translating his look to the screen. The atmosphere is AWESOME!

I am perhaps alone on this one, but Dr Strangelove should be left alone. Are you seriously trying to tell me there is someone who could hold a candle to Stanley Kubrick? There are very few today in my humble opinion. Ridley scott maybe, but I would like to think that he would agree that the original was as good as it could be and its just not possible to improve it. Are there any actors who would take the challenge of playing three parts as Peter Sellers did? Is the topic even relevant now? Strangelove is a film of its times. That is what makes it so much fun.

I have seen too many great and wonderful movies being shoddilly remade by idiotic studios who only see a cash cow, and then proceed to screw the whole thing up. And you can just bet theyre going to remove the line "You cant fight in here.... this is the war room!"

robochrist wrote:Sadly, I can't express the same in your behalf: MUST you be such a pussy for fear of getting your ass eaten by a big stupid ant? I'd get out and take him on like a Hoboken Whore!

Hey, I wanted to go find the ants. It was my friends who wimped out.

(Another true story: As a kid I visited my grandparents house in the desert and discovered, MUCH to my chagrin and pain, what desert red ants are capable of. They don't take kindly to their nest being tramped upon by a ten year old, I can tell you that.)

- I love to find adventure. All I need is a change of clothes, my Nikon, an open mind and a strong cup of coffee.

OK - well, that redeems you a TAD. I hope you made them understand what pussies they were. Remember my adage: The BEST way to feel good about yourself is by making others about you feel small, stupid, and inferior.

That's pretty much how the giant ants looked at it in THEM!

Reddraggon,

I'm only being respectful about this, because I too am a Kubrick fanatic:

No one ever mentioned Dr. Strangelove. Few here would be stupid enough to actually try and re-do what was inherently Kubrick's (BASED on the Peter George Novel, RED ALERT, the story is completely reworked into pure Kubrick). I said FEW here, of course.

We only posted to the name Dr. Strange. That's what we're talking about.

"Doctor Strange has already been done as an only fair tv pilot in the 1970s."

That's the why a remake would be justified. The TV version was REALLY watered down; no semblance of a complex Marvel character was to be seen. They made Strange more of a sort of playboy-type, from what I recall when I rented it. It was at least more intelligently written than standard tv fare. But it's criminal to abandon Marvel's more dynamic and mercurial characterization.

I just wish I could feel confident a remake would be any better.

The results for Iron Man give me hope, but I learned not to count on the Hollywood paucity out there.

OK - well, that redeems you a TAD. I hope you made them understand what pussies they were. Remember my adage: The BEST way to feel good about yourself is by making others about you feel small, stupid, and inferior.

That's pretty much how the giant ants looked at it in THEM!

Reddraggon,

I'm only being respectful about this, because I too am a Kubrick fanatic:

No one ever mentioned Dr. Strangelove. Few here would be stupid enough to actually try and re-do what was inherently Kubrick's (BASED on the Peter George Novel, RED ALERT, the story is completely reworked into pure Kubrick). I said FEW here, of course.

We only posted to the name Dr. Strange. That's what we're talking about.

Sorry I should have mentioned I read elsewhere theyre doing a remake. Just in the possible stages at the moment. The Dr strange reminded me of reading about it and well.... I hope its gonna stay at the "Maybe" stage

"Sorry I should have mentioned I read elsewhere theyre doing a remake"

You have GOT to be fuckin' KIDDING!!!!!

That is UN-GODDAMN-BELIEVABLE!!!!!!!!

That news missed my radar.

I guess I SHOULDN'T be surprised, since they're even trying to remake Casablanca. But I AM.

I could see them going back to RED ALERT. That's another matter. A novel is a novel.

But if they're actually assholish enough - and I wouldn't put it passed 'em - to literally remake Strangelove itself - a KUBRICK property - I hope they're dissuaded legally by the Kubrick estate or SOME damn thing like that.

Actually robochrist I'm not sure how much legal claim the Kubrick estate would have at this point. He famously destroyed all the models and props from 2001 so they wouldn't wind up appearing in TV commercials and bad B movies (remember Robby the Robot's post-Forbidden Planet "career"?).

Kubrick opposed the making of the sequel to 2001 and it got made nevertheless (and was instantly dated when the pesky Soviet Union went and collapsed on them).

...Roddenberry's triad of Spectre, Genesis II (NOT Planet Earth, the second pilot) and The Questor Tapes.

Yeah I had completely forgotten about those movies. Any of that stuff on DVD?

“We must not always talk in the marketplace,” Hester Prynne said, “of what happens to us in the forest.”-Nathaniel Hawthorne, The Scarlet Letter

Well, JOSH may know the situation here, but it was Kurbrick's own production company, Harris-Kubrick, who DID Dr. Strangelove.

I would think the only other party who'd have legal say on the film would be the distributor (which I THINK was UA at that time), and how now OWNS that distributor.

Who knows what the Kubrick estate has done with that ownership since? For all I know, they went ahead and ok'd the rights.

But your other facts are off:

Kubrick WAS asked permission to do 2010: Peter Hyams himself phoned Kubrick and got the go-ahead.

I'm not saying, necessarily, mind you, that MGM could not have gone ahead to do it without Kubrick's approval; I think they'd have had the right because they were the ones who picked up the novel from Clarke. The original was owned by both Kubrick and Clarke. But I AM saying, according to Hyams, he would not have made the movie WITHOUT Kubrick's approval. And Hyams was the guy doing the project.

But Kubrick did not "OPPOSE" doing the sequel. He himself didn't want to do a sequel. But he didn't oppose someone else doing it by the time the 1980's rolled 'round.

Now, Robby the Robot is not a good model to serve the argument, because MGM, the studio itself that owned the rights to Robby, had decades of cash-flow from licensing out the robot's appearances. The propriety is very clear in THAT scenario.